You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Known problems in v2 (should be fixed at version 3):
"replicas" appears in a dataset definition directly. It should be placed under "volume".
We cannot put replicas under a slice. (note: actually this can be done on the latest implementation for v2, but it is invalid as a v2 catalog.)
"volume" should be optional. If a slice doesn't have "volume", the slice itself should be parsed as a volume.
Otherwise, we'll see deeply nested JSONs like: "dataset-volume-replicas-slices-slice-volume-replicas-..."
Replicas according to application by use. For example:
Replica 1: There is only one slice. This should be used for generic search.
Replica 2: There are time-sliced slices. This should be used for search with year.
Replica 3: There are category-sliced slices. This should be used for search with category.
For these replicas, search requests should be delivered only for suitable replica for the use case.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Known problems in v2 (should be fixed at version 3):
"replicas" appears in a dataset definition directly. It should be placed under "volume".
We cannot put replicas under a slice. (note: actually this can be done on the latest implementation for v2, but it is invalid as a v2 catalog.)
"volume" should be optional. If a slice doesn't have "volume", the slice itself should be parsed as a volume.
Otherwise, we'll see deeply nested JSONs like: "dataset-volume-replicas-slices-slice-volume-replicas-..."
Replicas according to application by use. For example:
For these replicas, search requests should be delivered only for suitable replica for the use case.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: